I have a topic but since I am not sure that I would find someone to debate I will add it and ask that a mod U2U me if this is even possible.

I would like to debate the pro side for the sovereignty discussion, NOT the movement, as I am aware there are wayyy to many people out there taking
advantage, but the actual reason behind it, why, and those that actually believe this to be a good thing and are using it for their own personal
freedoms and not to be untruthful.

The reason for the mod request is I would like to ask for a longer length time (more than 3 posts) for this, as I feel it is needed. And as for a
debate partner, I would ask that we leave out the "regular" arguments and actually use the law, and state rights, as opposed to the usual route
taken in these kinds of discussion for example crazy lone gunman, militias and the such.

So if someone is up for the task, please let me know, as you can see I like to debate the over the top topics, and I am hoping that this would be a
very open discussion without the usual derailing and argument, but 2 people discussing an important topic, and hopefully a non-judgmental judging as
well.

Note: this will be a nice change from all that I'm presently reading about the Boston bombings...seems like the more I read, the more it smells
like...the stuff I could barely stand every time I changed my kid's diapers...

I just wanted to apologize fighters... My real life has been rather chaotic for the past several weeks and the events in Boston have kept me so busy (
as ATS staff ) that I've hardly been able to even post replies, much less research and post a debate entry.

It is my intention, barring unforeseen issues, to post a reply to the debate I am in at some point tonight or early tomorrow.

I'll take the con position, as I have theory that everyone I've told so far has said yes, they agree to it. It is such an obvious anomaly, but
nobody has noticed it yet.

I'm confused -- are you saying that you are taking the "con" position of the argument that it was not a false flag event? So you're really saying
it was a false flag event? If so, I'd take the debate, if the terms were switched (topic being that the Boston Bombings were a false flag event, and
you go first.)

If it's the other, that you're "con" on it being a false flag, then I'd agree with you and the debate is over

I would have loved to debate that one with you Druid, unfortunately, commitments and deadlines prevent me from making more than a passing comment to
say you are indeed brave for taking that topic on. I've been silently watching it from afar and it's as big a hotbed as the rest of the recent
major news stories.....

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.